Quoted By:
one must always assume that these entities propped up by the government, will always de-facto have twice the authority they have de jure, because the regulated (companies in particular) very rarely, if ever, contest their decisions, even when they are clearly idiotic and outside their scope. I've made this point before many times before, citing FINMA as example: the few times i know of in which their decisions have been challenged was by companies already dissolving, massive players dealing with politicized decisions, and stakeholders not involved in the company's management, and that's because board members and management know that you don't challenge FINMA decisions and """recommendations""" if you want to keep a quiet unproblematic activity going. if you do challenge them, they'll likely come after you like hyenas for the (short) rest of your enterprise's days (unless you're one of the reeeeallly big players >100 billions in AUM and the such).
and then wonder why there are so few information around on the exact activity of these institutions...
so a 50% legal authority "upgrade" translates into a 100% de facto authority extension. You cannot concede an inch to these parasites, because they'll use it to buttrape you (without lube).
